What Did Sarah Palin Mean by “Blood Libel”?

Former reality-show participant and private citizen Sarah Palin released a video today in which she responded to the Tucson tragedy, and implored viewers to avoid casting aspersions on any individual or group (particularly Sarah Palin) for influencing alleged gunman Jared Lee Loughner. “If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision,” she said. “If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn.” “Blood libel”? What exactly is this phrase about which everyone will, in a matter of minutes, have undoubtedly formed immutable opinions?According to Politico’s Ben Smith, “it typically refers historically to the alleged murder of Christian babies by Jews, and has been used more recently by Israeli's supporters to refer to accusations against the country.” More recently, as Smith observes, journalist Glen Reynolds of Instapundit used the term, in the very context Palin did, in a Wall Street Journal editorial published on January 10. “I don’t necessarily know that Palin picked up the phrase from me,” Reynolds told Smith. “I think a lot of people in the blogosphere were using that description.”

It is Palin’s invocation of the term, though, that’s made headlines. The Guardian reports: “Palin’s bizarre use of language is sure to provoke further controversy—a blood libel refers to the false claim that Jews murder children to use in religious rituals. Giffords is Jewish.” The New York Times generously suggests that Palin was “inventing a new definition for an emotionally laden phrase.” This claim checks out: Palin’s greatest post-political joy is the retroactively intentional coining of new words and phrases. “Blood libel” is currently trending on Twitter, suggesting that she has not lost her neologistic touch.